CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 12 janvier 2025

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 27 January 2025   FOURTH SECTION Application no. 25504/23 Francisco Manuel SEIXAS DA COSTA against Portugal lodged on 16 June 2023 communicated on 12 January 2025 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applicant is a retired diplomat with an active social media presence. By a judgment of the Criminal Court of Porto of 26 September 2022, upheld by the Court of Appeal of Porto on 22 February 2023, the applicant was convicted of aggravated defamation and fined with 2,200 euros (EUR) and ordered to pay EUR 6,000 in respect of non-pecuniary damage to S.C., a football coach, for a tweet published on the social network Twitter at the material time in which the applicant called him “brute” ( javardo ) in relation to a football game at which S.C. had sworn at the supporters of the opposing team. Relying on Article 10 of the Convention, the applicant complains that his conviction has breached his right to freedom of expression. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES Has there been an interference with the applicant’s right to freedom of expression within the meaning of Article 10 § 1 of the Convention? If so, was that interference prescribed by law and necessary in terms of Article   10 §   2 (see, Couderc and Hachette Filipacchi Associés v. France [GC], no.   40454/07, §§ 117-21, ECHR 2015 (extracts); Delfi AS v. Estonia [GC], no.   64569/09, §§ 110 and 136, ECHR 2015;   Almeida Azevedo v. Portugal , no.   43924/02, §   23, 23 January 2007; Annen v. Germany , no.   3690/10, §§   66 ‑ 67, 26 November 2015; and Almeida Arroja v. Portugal , no.   47238/19, §§   67-72, 19 March 2024?)